Satan Never Sleeps (1962) User Reviews

okay drama

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 4 March 2009]

William Holden and Clifton Webb star in "Satan Never Sleeps," a 1962 drama also starring France Nuyen. It's directed by Leo McCarey - it's his last film.

The story concerns a priest, Father O'Banion (William Holden) who comes to a mission in China to relieve an elderly priest, Father Bovard (Clifton Webb). A young girl, Siu Lan (Nuyen) is in love with O'Banion and has followed him. The Communists seize the mission, and the leader rapes Siu Lan, who becomes pregnant. The priests have to make an effort to flee China before it becomes too late.

Beautiful scenery is the highlight of this rather slow-moving story, as well as the beauty of young France Nuyen, who plays her part very well. Clifton Webb, as usual, does an excellent job as a tired old priest who is seeing his efforts at Christianity being rubbed out by the Communists, the leader being one of the boys he taught. Holden makes a handsome priest, but let's face it, there was never really anything very priestly about William Holden. One can never imagine such a man being celibate, which is probably why Siu Lan was following him all over the place.

There is a major personality change toward the end of this movie that really renders it foolish - not that such a thing couldn't happen, but not in that short period of time.

"Satan Never Sleeps" is not up to the standards of Leo McCarey, whose 43-year-career included "The Awful Truth," "Bells of St. Mary's" and "Going My Way." There are some good scenes, though, and the actors are likable.

Under-rated melodrama which could be viewed as an unofficial remake of Going My Way.

[barnabyrudge · 6/10 · 24 December 2003]

Satan Never Sleeps is the final film by great director Leo McCarey, whose finest hour was probably the fondly-remembered Going My Way. This is almost a remake of Going My Way in many ways, but back in 1962 when the film was released it was savaged by critics who found it vulgar, cliche-ridden and boring. When I first saw the film in 1993, I was pleasantly surprised by it. The performances are good, the story maintains a reasonable level of interest, and it is shot colourfully. The film is certainly overlong and some of the characters are painted in too broad strokes, but apart from that the critics were unfairly unkind to the film.

Father O'Banion (William Holden) and Father Bovard (Clifton Webb) are a couple of Catholic priests running a remote mission post in China in 1949. O'Banion has recently befriended a young Chinese woman Siu Lan (France Nuyen), but she makes him feel uncomfortable by frequently flirting with him and hinting that she would like to share his bed. Communist forces move into the area and damage the priests' chapel. To add to their woes, Siu Lan is raped and impregnated, and the Communist forces order the public execution of all Christians in the region. Ultimately, they have to flee for safety, pursued by Communist soldiers.

The film was actually filmed in England and Wales, but only occasionally does the lack of authentic location lensing show. Holden gives a decent performance and Webb, though miscast, is entertaining to watch as his older companion. Nuyen strikes the right balance as the flirtatious native girl. The worst performance comes from Weaver Lee, as a Chinese communist colonel - his character is written as a caricature rather than a realistic person, and he just can't get across a convincing reading of the role. On the whole, Satan Never Sleeps is an engrossing, diverting way to pass a couple of hours - certainly not the mega bomb that the critics would have you believe.

Ho San's character arc not fully addressed by others

[leed515 · 7/10 · 28 December 2008]

While others have discussed their concern regarding the "reward" of Ho San as escaping with the woman that he raped to a free Hong Kong, no one so far has addressed the impact of Ho San's parents on the overall story - nor the impact of their deaths on his ultimate reversal.

Throughout the story, whether it is their attendance at Mass during Ho San's speech or assisting during birth of Siu Lan's child or their ultimate murder during the response to the villagers' riot in the mission's chapel, Ho San's parents were the anchor of the faithful, the always believing Chinese catholics. His parents' steadfast commitment to the parish and the priests themselves lend support to the mission and the church from a congregant's perspective and also show their devoutness even in the face of having a son who was the high ranking communist in the village - one who was previously an alter boy as well as a potential candidate for the priesthood.

I think that the writers/director were showing the impact, however subtle, of their killing in the chapel and their bearing of the crucifix during the riot - they never wavered in their devotion to the church. The movie also shows Ho San's reaction from behind to the killing - he's standing very stiffly, suppressing his sobs and trying not to show his wiping of tears. For a devout son in the Chinese culture, the death of one's parents clearly has an impact as well as the manner of their death - their unceasing devotion to the church - might well be seen as the final reason for his decision to abandon the communist party. I think that many of the users who have responded to date have failed to see the embedding of the story in a Chinese cultural context. The parallelism also not drawn by others is in his parents carrying the cross into the chapel cannot be missed by someone who was been raised a Catholic.

Another point raised is Siu Lan's acceptance of Ho San as a husband in the context of the movie. Given her parochial upbringing in both Catholic and Confucian cultures, Siu Lan's only hope of redemption and support would have been to find a husband - literally any man who would marry her - given that she has to be married in order to be a mother and the overwhelming need to make sure that her child has a family context. Whether or not Ho San's decision was impacted by the fact that the baby was a boy should also be considered - but I'll let the community debate that one. Also, that there was a civil war underway and that conflict on the mainland had been going on since the late 1920's, Siu Lan's decision on needing a husband as well as her maturation as a responsible mothering character seems to be obvious.

For myself, I was more troubled by the use of Cantonese as the dialect of the people in this movie. If this village were as hard to get to as the movie made it out to be, it would surely be far away from areas where Cantonese is the dominant dialect. Because of this and other factors, I think it is obvious that the movie was clearly intended for Western audiences and should be considered in that context. Also, given the time when the movie itself was written and released, the true brutality of the takeover period is not nor could not be reflected in the movie. Additionally, the giving of receipts for things such as the jeep or the mission is representative of the bureaucratic/absurdist view of the communist system during the 1950's and 60's.

I would encourage everyone to appreciate this movie from not only the context in which it was written and filmed but also from the collision of cultures that are juxtaposed and intertwined.

Depressing and Ultimately Unsatisfying

[Jobin17 · 29 March 2001]

This film, set in Mao's China during the Communist Revolution proved to be an almost infuriating film to view. It was the final film of Leo McCary's fantastic (and eclectic) directing career ("Duck Soup," "The Bells of St. Mary's). The story centers around a young priest, Father O'Bannion (William Holden) sent to relieve an aging priest in a Chinese mission. He meets a wide-eyed, idealistic young Chinese girl (France Nuyen) along the way. When he arrives at the mission, all hell seems to break loose. Without divulging too much plot...our young priest encounters many battles: fending off the affection of the young girl; remaining true to his faith, and abstaining from self-defense and violence (even under extreme duress); and pleasing his aging sage, the older preist (Clifton Webb). Why did this movie bother me? Well, in a nutshell: the young girl professes her love for Father O'Bannion...and he realizes he must send her off, despite his *true* feelings. Later, a character rapes the young girl while Father O'Bannion can only look on in desperation (after being tied up). After the inital horror, the good Father suscribes to the ideal that the resulting son needs a father. No matter who it is. When the rapist returns to see is his son, O'Bannion more or less encourages the young woman to form a family. This after our new "dad" has watched communists kill his parents in cold blood for the simple act of worshipping Christ. I suppose this movie is "pure to the period." But it's a tough movie to view in this day and age. A rapist is never properly punished. A man supresses his true feelings of love for a woman, who then must live with her attacker "just so the child can have a father." The finale is as wacky as forgiving rape for "family's sake." The charming Nuyen and Holden give solid performances, but the message sent, and the film itself, left me frustrated and somber.

China vs the church

[bonair1 · 7/10 · 20 December 2007]

While typical of the films of the 1950's in its style and perhaps anti communist profiling, it never the less gives us an insight into the total brutality that the communist showed towards the catholic church and for that matter any religion that wasn't ordained by chairman mao. One could almost imagine the actions of this film even today as the communist in china continue to maintain their stance of brutality against the catholic faith. this could be because so far the Holy See remains the one and only government to recogine the sovereign rights of Taiwan. As for the relationship between the woman and the priest I aggree that this is rather simplified and does leave one wondering exactly how old she would have been and if perhaps she suffered from some form of mild social retardation.

CHANGE IN CHINA

[kirbylee70-599-526179 · 7/10 · 4 April 2019]

How times have changed. A title like this today would conjure up fears of horror fueled dreams. But back in 1962 that wasn't the case. This is no horror film but a drama that revolves around the changes in China that took place when Mao took over. It is also the last film in the long and wonderful career of director Leo McCarey who gave us such films as DUCK SOUP, THE AWFUL TRUTH, GOING MY WAY and THE BELLS OF ST. MARY'S. While this film might have a few humorous moments it is anything but a comedy though.

It's 1949 and the Chinese Civil War is nearing an end. Mao Tse Tung's Communist soldiers have taken over most of the country. This results in a complete change in the country and in particular for this story a missionary establishment there. Father O'Banion (William Holden) is on his way to take over from retiring Father Bovard (Clifton Webb), too old and frail to continue on here. On his journey there O'Banion has unfortunately gained a young Chinese girl named Siu Lan (France Nuyen) along the way. The girl has fallen in love with him and claims he saved her thus she now owes him her life. Before Bovard can leave though the Communist Army takes over the mission.

No matter how hard he tries O'Banion can't seem to get the girl to return to her family. Bovard gets involved when their cook leaves to join the army leaving O'Banion to cook (which he does poorly) and Siu Lan steps in to take over. Bovard is forbidden to leave by the incoming man in charge Ho San (Weaver Lee). Ho San was once a member of Bovard's flock but has since converted to Communism with a vengeance.

Under Ho San's rule the mission is destroyed by his men, the church is desecrated and the priests are confined to quarters. Eventually this leads to imprisoning Bovard while trying to force him to sign a document claiming he lied to the villagers and supports Communism. With his eye set on Siu Lan he returns to the mission, ties up O'Banion and taking Siu Lan to a different building rapes her. The resulting child and the command to kill all Christians has an effect on Ho San but will it be too late?

This is not a lightweight film by any means. While there are a few moments that lighten things a bit, most of them involving the predicament O'Banion finds himself in with Siu Lan, the main focus of the story revolves around the change in the country and the people of China. These are dangerous times and the treatment of the two priests displays this throughout the film as does their determination to remain true to their faith.

The movie is an intense look through the eyes of the times providing a look at Communist China at the height of the Communist scare in this country. While considered by some to be a false flag there definitely was something going on at the time to be fearful of and recent events have seen much of those fears culminate in the country becoming a world power to contend with now. But the movie's depiction of them here is more along the lines of a rampaging wild animal than a thoughtful conniving group. But then these are the new converts in the field, not the rulers.

The movie also deals with the feelings that Holden as O'Banion has for this young woman who is in love with him. She goes so far as to suggest that he leave the church so that he can marry her. While he is fond of her his feelings are not the same as hers for him. Or are they? That struggle plays a component in the character of O'Banion.

Webb as Bovard turns in a fine performance in what was to be his last film. He plays the character much like he did many roles in his time, as a stern countenance that watches over those around him, determined to shape them into the people he thinks they should be. But while stern he also has a compassionate side as well.

The movies may not suit the viewers of today, not offering explosions and car chases. And the romance depicted here does not give us longing looks and nude bodies writhing about in front of what always seems to be a perfectly located fireplace. Even the rape scene, no doubt quite controversial at the time, isn't shown here but rather inferred. I think in doing so it makes it that much more despicable and horrifying. The mind can create horrors that at times cameras cannot. This is one of those examples.

In the end the movie does not so much entertain as it does provide a glimpse at a world just learning about what was taking place in China at the time. Apologists will feel it's a distorted view and those who still have concern about the country will say it is an apt depiction. I would guess the truth lies somewhere in the middle of both of those views. In the meantime the film gives us the final glimpses of two illustrious careers, those of McCarey and Webb, while solidifying the star status of Holden and providing us an early look at France Nuyen who went on to a lengthy career. It's a movie worth watching.

Ending unreal -- but actress Nuyen is WOW!!

[dbrownridge · 6/10 · 31 May 2007]

It begins slow but builds, then falls on its face with an ending that is way beyond suspension of disbelief. But in that regard it mirrors many of today's movies so... I found the first half though to be ENCHANTING. Yeah, yeah, not a man's word but in this modern age of wholesale murder and chaos and a cinema that basically thinks that isn't enough and has to exaggerate further to the point of bloody insanity, this movie enchants. The chemistry and interaction between the old priest (Webb), the middle-aged priest William Holden and the young Chinese woman (France Nuyen) is touching and hilarious. I cannot recall a modern movie that made me laugh out loud like this one. It's not slapstick or stupid lines involving sex or bodily function, it's subtle and pleasant, two things long forgotten nowadays.

Father O'Banion (William Holden) and Father Bovard (Clifton Webb) are a couple of Catholic priests running a remote mission post in China in 1949. O'Banion has recently saved the life of a young Chinese woman Siu Lan (France Nuyen), who now says he is responsible for her life, as tradition dictates. She further makes him feel uncomfortable by falling in love with him and wanting to marry. Communist forces move into the area and damage the priests' chapel and create overall havoc.

It is Nuyen's utterly STUNNING natural beauty, her radiant countenance that makes this movie -- her range of expression is beyond words. I have seen virtually all the great actresses and Nuyen almost shames them -- really. When she smiles with joyful happiness I swear I almost started to cry. I have never seen such purity and honesty of expression. I couldn't believe she was acting. Her sorrow, despair, anger, desperation, infatuation, playfulness are all so genuine it's simply extraordinary. Okay, maybe I'm a bit thunderstruck, I mean her dialogue is pretty simple. But I can't help it.

Together with Holden's primarily stoic expressions which include only frustration, and the old priest's constant sarcastic insults to Holden (because he was late in relief and the priest got caught up in the war), I had to often muffle my howls of laughter lest my neighbors wake.

I knew then it was too good to be true however and something terrible would happen to Nuyen. But if that wasn't enough, then we have to be manipulated by a writer wanting us to believe that a priest will forgive absolutely anything -- murder, rape, pillage, desecration. Not only forgive but even assist the bad guy. In fact the old priest gives his life for the rapist, and the rapist gets the lovely woman he raped and escapes China. Freakin' brutal!! But damn I love Nuyen. Why couldn't she have been cast in more movies -- a cryin' shame. Oh, yes, the portrayal of communists is way over the top also. All in all, it's almost worth it to see Nuyen, so maybe just watch the first half and then pretend she and Holden run away together. Ahhh. So nice.

Unsuccessful as either comedy or drama...

[moonspinner55 · 5/10 · 10 December 2006]

William Holden (looking disinterested) and fey Clifton Webb are priests in the 1940s serving at a Chinese mission and being terrorized by the Red Chinese Army. Holden is actually being terrorized in another way as well--by twinkling servant Frances Nuyen, who's anxious to snuggle up to the heavy-sighing Man of the Cloth. Director Leo McCarey helmed this adaptation of Pearl Buck's novel as either a comedy-drama or as a drama with a comedic undermining (I'm not sure which, as the tone of the film strays all over the place). There are Communist takeover sequences such as the crucifix thrown on the fire which should be harrowing, but McCarey directs it thoughtlessly, cartoonishly. We never really fear for Holden or Webb's safety because the direction is so dispassionate (and Holden is so laconic) that fear seems nearly unwarranted. I actually found the Nuyen-seducing-Holden scenes more tasteless than the violence, and the pat conclusion is tacked on for silly relief--but by then the viewer has no idea where to stand emotionally with "Satan Never Sleeps". It's a curiosity, but not a particularly good example of one. ** from ****

Satan Never Sleeps=The Devil Made Them Do this Great Film ***1/2

[edwagreen · 9/10 · 27 December 2008]

William Holden and Clifton Webb make an engaging pair of priests in China at the time of the 1949 Communist take-over.

Since Holden arrives late to replace Webb at the mission, the latter isn't able to get out in time as the Communist forces invade.

This is a story of how 2 different priests in the way of Crosby and Fitzgerald in "Going My Way" come to know one another under such adverse conditions.

The film succeeds due to its depiction of the eventual disillusionment towards Communism of a Chinese person who almost became a priest before being totally brainwashed by the Red system.

France Nuyen is absolutely wonderful as the young girl, who is saved by the Holden character and refuses to leave him. There is definitely a comic take to this fine film as Priest Webb will eventually think that her unborn child is that of Father O'Banion (Holden)

The film shows how the Communists would go to any length, including murder to get their point across. It shows how individual thought is done away with under the Communist system.

Propaganda Unworthy of the Talent Employed

[dglink · 6/10 · 5 October 2020]

Passably entertaining, but often unconvincing, silly, and down-right hokey, Leo McCarey's film of Pearl S. Buck's original screenplay "China Story," "Satan Never Sleeps" takes place during the Communist takeover of China in the late 1940's. Possibly seeking to replicate his success with the Oscar-winning "Going My Way," McCarey tackles the story of a younger priest sent to relieve an aging priest at a remote Chinese mission. However, the charming conflict between Bing Crosby and Barry Fitzgerald is beyond the reach of William Holden and Clifton Webb. Although Webb, in his final screen role, is quite good as crusty Father Bovard, Holden as Father O'Banion is uneven, and neither actor benefits from France Nuyen's annoying presence. The French-Vietnamese Nuyen's Siu Lan, a young Chinese girl with an obsession for Holden, mugs and grins like a schoolgirl in a childish performance that undercuts the film's moral core. Not only does Siu Lan moon over a man obviously twice her age, but she ignores his priestly vows and even suggests he switch religions to attain her goal. The lack of candor between O'Banion and Bovard with regard to Siu Lan's intentions is puzzling, given that the elder priest would have been O'Banion's confessor, and the entire situation could have been cleared at the outset.

The script by Claude Binyon and McCarey himself simplifies Communism and the Chinese Civil War; rather than explore issues and motivations in historical context, the film uses blatant propaganda to paint a good-versus-evil, black-and-white portrait of the period. The propagandist approach was likely Buck's, because she had been refused entry to China during this period. Helming his last film, McCarey directs with a heavy hand and cannot decide between light comedy, tragedy, and political drama; the film abruptly weaves between various moods and succeeds at none. Although poor rear projection and obvious painted backdrops mark the image, Oswald Morris's impressive cinematography captures the Welsh locations that convincingly stand in for rural China.

Marred by a simplistic political backdrop, an unconvincing dynamic between the two priests, and a performance by France Nuyen that grates like fingernails on a blackboard, "Satan Never Sleeps" is not worthy to be the swan song of two cinematic talents: Leo McCarey and Clifton Webb. Both are better remembered for their classics from the 1930's and 1940's. While Holden survived the film to give some remarkable performances in the following decades, Nuyen was relegated to minor roles, principally in television series. Unfortunately, this film is not a high point on any participant's resume.

Satan Will Turn You Into Rip Van Winkle

[bkoganbing · 2/10 · 10 November 2005]

Leo McCarey was one of Hollywood's best known anti-Communists around and for his last film decided to show the truth about the Communist Chinese persecution of Christians.

For a man who in his prime was considered one of the best comedy directors in Hollywood, all the laughs in this one came in all the wrong places. Not that there were to be too many laughs in this film.

The premise about two priests, a young one sent out to replace an old one worked real well for Going My Way. But Bing Crosby and Barry Fitzgerald weren't facing a Red Army invasion in Hell's Kitchen in New York.

William Holden and Clifton Webb play the two priests. Holden has picked up an extra passenger on the way to replace Webb. Before the action of the film starts, he's saved young France Nuyen from drowning and since it is a Chinese custom that a life saved is the saver's responsibility. She's offering herself to Holden and I should amend that to say she's throwing herself at him through most the film.

Apparently no one just sits down and explains the concept of celibacy to her. But the two priests have bigger problems when the forces of Mao Tse-tung arrive at the village.

The local commander is played by an actor named Weaver Lee who never made another film. I'm sure he was chosen for the part because of his resemblance to Chairman Mao. He's a former Christian and a protégé of Webb, but now like that other former seminarian Joseph Stalin, he's a committed revolutionary.

And he's a general no good and he tops off his reign of terror by raping France Nuyen and forcing Holden to watch to see what he's been missing. Is there no end to this man's diabolical cruelty? Lee is relieved of his duties as commander because he hasn't been ruthless enough and then he decides Christianity might have its advantages after all. What great character motivation.

This film did make it into the book as one of the 50 worst of all time and there's enough there to justify its inclusion. If this was anti-Communist propaganda, it's a miracle we won the Cold War.

Bill Holden survived this and next year turned in one of his best screen roles in The Counterfeit Traitor. This was Clifton Webb's last film. It was rumored that he retired and became a recluse after his mother died at 101. I'm not so sure it might have been from sheer embarrassment after Satan Never Sleeps. It was also Leo McCarey's last film.

Either you will snooze through this like Rip Van Winkle or you'll laugh yourself silly. Either way it was a lousy swan song for both Webb and McCarey.

Clifton Webb & William Holden Were Fantastic

[whpratt1 · 10/10 · 19 January 2005]

Always enjoyed the great acting of Clifton Webb,(Father Bovard),"Cheaper by the Dozen",'50 and his great performance in "Stars & Stripes Forever,",'52(John Phillip Sousa Story). In this picture, Webb plays an elderly Priest who is very strong willed against the Chinese Communists and the way they hurt the people and missionary's in China. William Holden,(Father O'Banion),"Picnic",'55 gives a great performance as Father Bovard's assisting Priest. There is comedy and also very sad situations in this film which made the film very entertaining for a 1960 film. Unfortunately, Clifton Webb made this film his Swan Song and gave one of his best performance in his career. Great Classic film actors made this film a film for all generations to view.

This movie hasn't aged well...

[JoeB131 · 6/10 · 6 March 2011]

This movie was released in 1962, the same year I was born, and it's one of the few things that has aged less gracefully than I have.

The plot involves a Catholic mission in Revolutionary China, where a couple of priests find themselves caught up in the machinations of the local Communist boss. Meanwhile, a young girl has a crush on the younger priest, while the Communist Boss lusts after her, eventually culminating in a rape.

A few things.

First, the characterizations of the Chinese Characters is really pretty racist. They are shown as dumb an child-like, being pulled by the Russian adviser on one side and the benevolent priests on the other.

Second is the whole issue of the rape. At the end of the story, the girl marries her rapist to give her son a name. I guess that is a reflection of a society where women are considered second class citizens (again, one of the ills communists were nominally trying to end!) Third, the William Holden character. I'm sorry, I just don't see William Holden, cynical character that he was, being a priest, where you just have to accept a lot of idealistic nonsense on face value. Maybe part of this view is based on all the other movies I've seen him in, from "Sunset Boulevard" to "Network" to "Stalag 17", playing these hard-boiled characters, but there was never anything spiritual about the guy.

Fourth, it is a cold war film, which means that any portrayal of communism is going to be negative.

Not to say that his character wasn't a joy to watch, because he's always a joy to watch, even when miscast.

Still, I'm giving this movie a positive review because of the solid performances. If it were made today, the rape scene would have been graphic, the priests would have been portrayed as huge hypocrites, and there would be a lot more explosions.

Pure, 100% crap....and this might be generous!

[planktonrules · 2/10 · 24 November 2012]

"Satan Never Sleeps" is a truly horrible film and there is little I can say positive about it. It's often dull and promotes a VERY dangerous message--and, while it's meant to be anti-communist, you can't help but think that crap like this actually makes America look really, really stupid.

The film begins with a young priest (William Holden) arriving very late to replace an aging priest (Clifton Webb). The problem is that a weird young lady (France Nuyen) has been following Holden across China--as she's infatuated with him and won't take NO for an answer. This is pretty stupid and is, in a way, a prelude for what is to eventually follow. Webb is VERY perturbed, as he's old and more than ready to leave the country--especially since a communist takeover is imminent.

Soon, the communists do come and their leader is bent on two important tasks--to break the priests and make the them confess to various crimes as well as to rape Nuyen. He's never able to break the men but, and here is where the film gets ugly and despicable, after raping and impregnating Nuyen, the priests encourage her to forgive and forget for the baby's sake!! And, over the course of the film, the nasty rapist leader slowly becomes a really swell guy and helps the folks escape. And, over the course of the film, Nuyen falls in love with him!!! Apparently, rape isn't bad at all in the world of "Satan Never Sleeps" and you wonder who the heck thought this was an acceptable message?! What's next--a film that asks the audience to empathize with a pedophile?! If you can ignore the sick message (and I pray that you can't!), you are left with a very badly written story that is, for the most part, stupid. It's really sad, as it was Clifton Webb's last film---and I loved him in all his other films up until this movie. He and the rest try hard to make this film work, but the script is just awful--so awful that its anti-communist message comes off as stupid and muddled.

PS--I noticed one review says this made it to the book the 50 worst movies of all time. I have a copy of Harry Medved's great book "The 50 Worst Movies of All Time" and it is NOT in this book and I really have no idea what book the other reviewer is referring to.

Contrived ending is creepy.

[westfall-d · 16 August 2002]

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS A SPOILER. This is a film with good acting, fine visuals and generally good writing. I do wonder about the editing and the contrived ending. Actor Weaver Lee, in his first important role, was placed in the impossible position of trying to make this character believable. He had to make us believe that he was a brainwashed communist so cruel as to have tortured those who loved and raised him and to have raped an innocent young girl. He is allowed to grind his teeth slightly when he watches his parents shot, presumably the beginning of his disillusionment with Communism. Then Mr. Lee has to make us believe that he is suddenly completely changed after seeing the result of his rape, a son. Perhaps Weaver Lee's career might have been furthered had he been allowed at least some kind of transition to make this character believable. Though this is a story of the triumph of good over evil -- and there is no doubt as to who is good and who is evil -- this one character is allowed to get away with atrocity after atrocity completely unpunished. Instead, he is rewarded with the girl, a son and a presumably free and happy future life. Not a mention of his hideous acts or any kind of payment therefor. In the context of this film, that ending gave me the creeps.

a story of sin and redemption vs. temptation and restraint.

[weezeralfalfa · 7/10 · 9 July 2008]

Yes, the screenwriter might well have been Joe McCarthy. I don't know how closely it follows the then recently published novel of the same title by Pearl Buck. Basically, a morality play in which the commies are the bad guys and the western Catholic priests, along with their Chinese converts, are the good guys. It also highlights the frequent problem of a woman falling in love with a priest and the intense conflict this can cause to both.

I would like to concentrate on the last part of the film, which is where many reviewers have a problem. Many don't feel that the rape of Siu-Lan was a necessary nor desirable part of the story and can't imagine that she would later willingly accept the rapist as her husband. As I see it, the rape serves 3 purposes in the story. First, it is another indication that the communist army is out of control. Rapes are a common accompaniment of wars, revolutions and major civil wars. Usually, under these circumstances, they go unpunished. Secondly, the child resulting from this rape serves as probably the deciding factor in the eventual acceptance by Siu-Lan and Father O'Banion(William Holden) of the rapist(Ho San) as Siu-Lan's husband. Ho San is thus rewarded for seeing the light and reconverting from Maoism to Catholicism. He is also being rewarded for saving the lives of Siu-Lan and Father O'Banion in their attempt to escape to Hong Kong. If he had not come along and interjected his plan for the escape, the others would have died along with Father Bovard in the bombing of his car.

Thirdly, the rape serves as another test of the Christian ideal of forgiveness of sins(turn the other cheek). Previously, Father O'Banion was forced to decide whether to strike back when Ho San repeatedly slapped him. At first, the Father did nothing, but eventually punched Ho San. The message is that the practice of this ideal has limits. Apparently, over time, the rape was eventually considered to be within these limits. Although this might seem implausible to many viewers, it wouldn't exactly be the first time in history it has happened.

Leo McCarey?? Really??

[ar-89423 · 1/10 · 28 August 2023]

Did Leo McCarey really direct this overblown piece of junk? Is this this thing actually based upon a story by Pearl Buck?

Astounding. What passes for a plot is grotesquely unfocused, the actors are disinterested, the whole thing is a snore.

It purports to detail the evils of Communism and so on, but it's really just an amorphous muddle of mumbo jumbo. Holden is just channeling his role in Bridge on the River Kwai. Clifton Webb, whose work in previous films was impeccable, just sleepwalks through this mess.

You want samples of McCarey before senility set in? Try The Awful Truth, Love Affair, Going My Way - and avoid this movie at all costs.

Fine Drama all around with Bill Holden, Clifton Webb and France Nuyen

[RogerMooreTheBestBond · 9/10 · 17 May 2020]

I saw this film over 20 years ago and remembered it very well. I just purchased the blu ray and thoroughly enjoyed the film again. Holden. a priest, comes to a mission in communist China along with France Nuyen. She is infatuated with Holden even though he tells her not too. He is to take the place of Clifton Webb, an aging priest at the mission. Ho San(Weaver Levy/Lee) is the communist leader who was to be a priest before he became a communist. The story shows how scary communism is and can be. The acting is superb by all 4 actors. France is raped by Ho San as Holden is prevented from helping her. Webb knows nothing us this until later on. Holden later on sneaks France away so she can leave. She returns and has the baby. Webb is told about what happened and who the father is and what he did. Ho San is replaced as leader and soon there is more killing and unrest and Ho San's parents are killed. He changes his ways and helps Holden, Webb and France and the baby escape. He also accepts responsibility to raise his child and change his ways. In the final scene Clifton Webb gives his life to save the others. Really well done film.

Anti-communist propaganda at its worst

[t-i · 5/10 · 15 October 2004]

This movie is a typical example of American 1950-1960's anti-communist propaganda. Regardless of one's political persuasion, the portrayal of the Communist soldiers (and in particular the Communist colonel Ho San) is ridiculously exaggerated, just like the priests, who seem to be pure saints. A very black-and-white story, shot in colour. It can be interesting to watch as a historical document from a time of ideological hostility at the height of the Cold War, but as a movie it has few appealing qualities.

One thing which truly disturbed me was how the Chinese people were portrayed. The only Chinese characters who act like adults are the Communist leaders. The rest of them mostly act like enthusiastic but stupid children (despite them being adults), which reeks of racism. Just look at the thieving cook, he acts like a total imbecil. Not to mention Siu Lan, who seems to have the mental qualities of a 10-year old. If you're interested in Cold War propaganda history, or have similar academic reasons for watching this movie, then by all means do. Few movies are so outspoken as this one in terms of purpose. But if you're looking for some nice cineastic entertainment, don't waste your time.

The shipwreck of China in 1949

[clanciai · 9/10 · 19 January 2022]

Unfortunately this film got the wrong director. Leo McCarey was known for entertaining blockbusters, while the subject and story here is sinister indeed, and the message of it all gets lost in a direction that clearly had no interest in the subject. Leo McCarey actually hated directing it, and he left it unfinished thoroughly disgusted with it, to let others finish it off. The story is very arguable indeed especially by the disinterested treatment given it by the direction, while the novel is by Pearl S. Buck, who if anyone knew her China. She if anyone knew what she was writing about whenever she wrote of China. The story is a grim account of the communist take-over in 1949, masking its imposition in pretty phrases and feigned demonstrations of good will, while gradually the destruction sets in, methodically going from bad to worse until finally there is nothing left but ruins and corpses. William Holden and Clifton Webb are the two priests who get caught in this force of pincers with no way out except martyrdom, while they can do nothing about the towering accumulation of atrocities. Leo McCarey was a good Catholic himself and made some very nice Christian films, above all "The Bells of St. Mary's" with Bing Crosby and Ingrid Bergman, but here the Christian bathos and tendencies must have become too much for him, so he abandoned the ship, letting it founder by itself, which it partly does. However, the acting is superb, so is the music and the cinematography, but to make a film like this a more serious director would have been needed with some detachment and perspective to the story he actually is filming,

The Oz Version is a leading candidate for Worst "A" Movie Ever Made!

[JohnHowardReid · 1/10 · 20 July 2017]

A Leo McCarey Production. Copyright 1 March 1962 by 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening simultaneously at the Paramount and 72nd Street Playhouse: 21 February 1962. U.S. release: March 1962. London opening: February 1962. U.K. release: 19 March 1962. Australian release: 31 May 1962. 12,009 feet. 133 minutes. This full-length version was released only in Australia. In America the film was cut to 126 minutes. This U.S. version was used at the London opening, but for U.K. general release the film was cut further to just 120 minutes.

U.K. release title: The DEVIL NEVER SLEEPS. Desperate alternative U.S. title: FLIGHT FROM TERROR.

SYNOPSIS: Communist forces have over-run China. Father O'Banion (William Holden), an Irish-American priest, is delayed from relieving Father Bovard (Clifton Webb), at the Mission of San-Li-Wan by the behavior of a beautiful Chinese maiden, Siu-Lan (France Nuyen). The girl, whom O'Banion saved from flood waters, is infatuated with the priest and refuses to leave him since an ancient custom makes him responsible for her welfare.

NOTES: Filmed in England, with exterior locations in Wales.

VIEWERS' GUIDE: In general, not suitable for adults, children, movie fans, film critics, casual picture goers, Communists, Catholics, atheists, Orientalists and romanticists. In particular, not suitable for fans of William Holden, Clifton Webb, France Nuyen, Leo McCarey, Pearl S. Buck and Claude Binyon.

COMMENT: It's hard to believe this picture isn't so much as casually referred to in any of the books dealing with the Worst Movies of All Time. Maybe the reason for this peculiar neglect lies in the simple fact that, unlike most of the other candidates on Worst Film lists, this one isn't even the slightest bit entertaining.

"So bad, it's funny!" doesn't apply to "Satan Never Sleeps". It's just plain bad. Sure it's ludicrous too, but all this unintentional humor is well and truly suffocated by a dreadfully dreary script that even in its McCarthyist day seemed an impossibly dated jingoistic tract.

But intolerably tedious though the script is, it positively scintillates by comparison with McCarey's pedestrian direction. Even the hokey dialogue is slightly less determinedly dreary. And as for the morality — or rather obscenity — of this propagandist charade... I'm afraid there's no other word for it, "Satan Never Sleeps" is a real stinker.

It's hard to decide who is the more outrageously miscast: Webb or Holden. Me, I go for Webb.

To sum up: An embarrassingly corny script, amateurishly acted, listlessly directed... A total wash-out in all departments. The normally brilliant Ossie Morris seems to have used blotting paper in his camera instead of film stock.

A wonderful film that shoots it's self in the foot.

[RT Firefly · 4 January 2002]

This film is a living testimony to the fact that the messages sent in a movie do matter, not only socially, but also to the quality of the film it's self. In other words, just because a movie has good production value and acting does not make it a great film (e.g. Pulp Fiction, in my humble opinion) I know what I just said is not politically correct, but try reconciling the events in this movie with your emotions afterwards and I'm sure you will agree. Over all this is a wonderful film, very well directed by award winning comedic impresario Leo McCarey (An Affair To Remember, Going My Way, Duck Soup, and many others). Fantastic scenery and cinematography, solid acting all around, well... Holden is okay I guess, but I've never been a huge fan of his. Every one else, even the unknown Weaver Lee as the communist Colonel Ho San gives a strong performance, but the message of the film is unforgivable. This could have been a classic if it had a better storyline. France Nuyen (South Pacific) is spectacular. I found her every bit as appealing as any sex symbol, including the 3M's (I.E.) Monroe, Margret, Mansfield. If any woman could make a man forsake the priesthood, she was it (WOW!) The movie is worth watching just for her. But, back to my point, the messages sent in the film are so disturbing, it is no wonder no one has ever heard of it.

WARNING! THIS PARAGRAPH CONTAINS SPOILERS.

The villain in the story, Ho San, is an ex catholic turned communist that is now persecuting the mission that cared for him and his family. He rapes Siu Lan (France Nuyen), orders the destruction and desecration of the church and even is responsible for his own parents being shot for saving a crucifix from a fire. And his comeuppance for these atrocities? He gets the girl (the one he raped) and escapes to communist free Hong Kong. It makes it impossible to like this film.

I suppose Satin Never Sleeps could develop a cult following among communist rapists, but I'm not sure how large that market is. Actually, come to think of it, this film may well have a future.

a true stinker

[rupie · 2/10 · 23 October 2012]

I rented this because of the presence of William Holden and Clifton Webb. It turns out that they are completely undone by a hopelessly wretched script. The relationship between Holden's Father O'Banyan and the ingenue Siu Lan, played by France Nuyen, could have been treated as a serious conflict between the dictates of priestly celibacy and the temptations of the flesh. Instead Holden and Nuyen play it as low-grade bedroom farce, because that's what the script calls for. The dialogue throughout is weak, jejune, and pedestrian. And Nuyen's portrayal of Siu Lan, despite the commendations of others here, is one of the most annoying characterizations I have ever seen. Nuyen's over-the-top sexy mugging becomes terminally cloying. Clifton Webb seems to have been hired to fulfill his reputation as an expert in portraying crotchety and fussy old queens, a task he discharges here with his usual panache. As far as the political aspects of the story, I am as anti-Communist as they come, but the Commies in this flick are as phony as the mustachioed villains in Victorian melodrama. The characterization of the Russian interloper Kuznietsky invokes laughter rather than fear. The final spiritual conversion of the central villain, Ho San, is as unconvincing and contrived as the hokey happy ending.

But the cinematography was nice.

A little out there, Great Beginning - Lost me at the End.

[Phantasy_star_4 · 8/10 · 8 January 2008]

I like old movies, so much and the Beginning of this movie pulled me right into it. I watched with wide eyes, the beautiful colors, and great actors, and nice beginning to a story i believed to be a nice romance. It then hits me, why are the Chinese speaking so well in their ability to use English? lol. The movie tended to show the Chinese to be mindless kids doing there daily chores but not knowing anything more than what they are told to do. I find this disturbing because they are a very well cultured and smart people. The story has a lot of instances where you think the main character a priest Father O'Banion played by William Holden is having feelings towards Siu Lan played by France Nuyen and maybe just maybe they would get together by the end of the film. But what ends up happening is a pushing away game the whole movie, Father O'Banion shows some feelings then all of a sudden tries to get the girl away from him, kind of destroys the mood so many times.

In the Midst of all the pushing away, a military man Ho San played by Weaver Lee, keeps making trouble for the Priest and the head priest and giving them receipts for things he takes from the priests such as wine, horses, food etc. Eventually he ends up raping Siu Lan and by the end of the movie they have a child? And eventually Siu Lan is OK with this....? as soon as that occurred i was turned off from the film i think it destroyed it really.. it was a great beginning the stretched out for too long , to leave you with a sense of wrong at the end.

I must say that the Actors were Spectacular in this film, France Nuyen was perfect for the role of Siu Lan and had the perfect charm to keep you watching. William Holden was a perfect example of a priest with past regrets and his trials at temptation. All in all this was a fun to watch movie, but with a flawed ending. I give it a 7 because No matter what the ending was, the beginning to me was a great start and the ending may be flawed but the movie was made more for propaganda than anything else around that time.

If you would like to see a movie about china, i would highly recommend " The Last Emporer ".

Generic incoherence sinks this film

[rockymark-30974 · 3/10 · 15 January 2022]

It's hard to think that an established film director could have lost control of a film like this. It blends several genres with neither rhyme nor reason. Probably the nadir in the film is when, after an entire film where the Red Guard officer in charge engages in brutal behavior the film switches to sitcom mode with him holding his baby in his arms.

Nothing makes sense in this film. As an outlier on many aesthetic issues I was fully prepared to like this film despite the negative reviews I read about it.

Indeed, it begin interestingly enough. France Nuyen was absolutely lovable in the very first scene where she's all wide smiles at everything that William Holden, as the priest says.

But after that the film falls apart. Though Nuyen looked quite charming in the first scene, after that her character becomes silly. Talk about a one-trick pony. All she does throughout is show that silly smile.

William Holden is always competent in all the films he plays. And he acquits himself as well as possible considering the silly script, which can't make up its mind what kind of genre it belongs to: romance, political, drama, sitcom, comedy, religious, etc.

Similar to Henry Fonda's witticisms in *On Golden Pond," Clifton Webb's character has to come up with funny lines to add to the confusion of genres.

The "conversion" of the Red Guard at the end of the film, embracing the Christianity he had renounced is one of the worst examples of character development I know of in a movie. Not only is the conversation unrealistic, equally unrealistic is expecting the other characters in the film to embrace him without apparent qualms. It's as if Hitler had a change of heart in 1945 and decided to embrace Christianity or American democracy. We have just seen this guy torture people yet we are to imagine him as a happy father married to a woman he raped. The only reason I give the film eve 3 stars is due to the presence of William Holden.

The title song sung by Timi Yuro is also an asset, though the arrangement is terrible. As for the title itself, though the critics I have read seem to think it applies to the communists, in fact it at least equally applies to the France Nuyen character who embodies Satan throughout the film, often literally reflecting lyrics in the song, since she never sleeps even when Holden attempts to.

Actually in a focused film the premise might have been very interesting. A woman is deeply in love with a priest and stalks him. But the film would have had to be generically focused as drama without the absurd blend of genres we find in the film.

One minor linguistic note. When Nuyen sees Holden wearing an apron she says, "That apron doesn't become you, Father." I just can't believe that a second-language speaker would have been sophisticated enough to have used the word "becomes" in "becomes you." Clearly the script writer nodded when he wrote that line.